State participation and artistic autonomy in creative city making

Abstract

Recent work on the development of cities based on culturally creative economies, or creative cities has opened up productive lines of theorization and empirical research. However, with its focus on the composition of a creative cluster or the ingredients of a creative city, the existing literature fails to clarify adequately the whys and hows of state participation in urban contexts. This can lead to flawed interpretations of contemporary creative city dynamics in China. This paper suggests the state and its related political processes shape urban social relationships and have wider and deeper impacts on the outcomes of creative networking, artistic autonomy, and creative city scripts. With reference to the cases of visual art clusters in Beijing and Xiamen, this paper reveals the specific paths of creative city development based on a conceptual framework by which the interrelationships among the participation of the state, creative networking, and artistic autonomy can be discovered. This paper argues that, unlike the implicit or hidden state participation in Euro-American experiences, the participation of the state in China is obvious and dominant, thus molding specific stories of state-led artistic urbanization or manufacturization. Rather than being simply the displacement of artists, the on-the-ground creative city is interwoven with a selective structure designed by the state and shaped by artists' position-taking strategies, which are embedded in, and interlaced with, historical-geographical contexts and contingencies.

Bandung Creative Class: Fostering Creative Characters of Citizens in Bandung City as a Strengthening of 21st Century Competency

“…Whereas the collective order here is the community and the forum which are the collective power of the community. Support from these two parties is very important as explained by Chang (2018) in his research results that the development of creative cities in China is strongly influenced by the cooperation of the State government with creative artists and producers as as various parties outside the government.…”

Happy town: Cultural governance and biopolitical urbanism in China

“…The promotion of creativity in China has indeed been largely top-down, with a heavy government hand stifling innovation in the name of social harmony and commercial expansion. Artists and other ''creative producers'' find themselves in precarious positions, as has been argued by Visser (2010), Zhang (2014), andChang (2019). And as a result, China's state-deployed cultural economy increasingly resembles Debord's (1994) spectacle society, a depoliticizing force engineered for economic gain and defanged of the powerful political subversion that culture once represented during the Mao and early reform eras.…”